QB battle: Dead even? Doubtful

by Jeff Nusser on Aug 23, 2009 10:43 PM PDT

You might remember that I wrote a fairly lengthy post in which I assessed all that had been said and observed and reached the conclusion that Kevin Lopina would be the starter at quarterback when the season kicked off on Sept. 5.

Well, Paul Wulff and offensive coordinator Todd Sturdy are doing their best to make me look silly.

When asked if Lopina and Marshall Lobbestael were even in the race to start, Sturdy told Howie Stalwick: "Yep." He later reiterated that stance with Vince Grippi over the weekend: "I just talked with the kids, and right now it is a dead heat."

However, I refuse to look silly.

What else is Sturdy supposed to say? True, coaches sometimes will come out and say that one guy's got the edge over the other guy, but that's usually done in the context of motivating the guy who's behind, or to give a little vote of confidence to the guy in front. That doesn't seem to be an issue here, as Lobbestael has worked his tail off to get where he is, and Lopina seems to be a guy who plays better with a chip on his shoulder.

Besides, what's it hurt to give Lobbestael every chance in the world to win the job? We all know that all things being equal, any coaching staff worth its salt would go with the younger guy who has a chance to help the program for multiple years. If both Lopina and Lobbestael give the team the same chance to win, it's a no-brainer to pick Lobbestael.

Thus, the "dead heat" pronouncement fits perfectly here, whether it's the truth or not. There's absolutely no reason to give the edge to one guy or the other at this point -- no advantage to be gained. Game planning for Stanford doesn't begin for another week, and since 50 percent of the receiving corps is injured anyway, it's not like the No. 1 guy could use 75 percent of the reps to work to get on the same page with those starters.

Because of all this, I've seen nothing to sway me from my original stance. I believe Lopina will be named the starter sometime this week, as everything continues to point to him. Even Grippi offers up this assessment:

If the competition were going to be decided solely by who was throwing the ball better in practice, especially in scrimmage situations, Kevin Lopina would be the guy, as far as I can tell.

Now, Grippi does go on (rightly) to say there are many other facets to quarterbacking that will play into the ultimate decision. But those are attributes at which Lopina seemed to have the edge all along. The one place where Lobbestael had the chance to distinguish himself is with his arm, and that doesn't seem to be happening. That Lopina is throwing the ball better in scrimmage situations seems to reinforce the notion that he's got the edge in the mental part of the game, too.

Could we be surprised? I suppose. But I don't think we're going to be.

Tweet Comment 4 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

What I am more surprised about is that Stanford

will be apparently starting their frosh over Pritchard. If I was the coach I wouldn’t screw things up and start a frosh against us. Hey Pritchard beat us 58-0 last yr, why would anybody do anything different against us?
If I really wanted my frosh to be the starting QB, I would bring him in the 2nd qtr after things have settled down a bit and Stanford is ahead 28-0.
My next question, is how far does the Coug football have to fall before Coug message boards become a ghost town? I really have been impressed by this sight, Cougfan, and wsufootballblog keeping up the articles and I am grateful for it! I just hope if we finish 2-10 again this year, you guys will keep writing.

by ptowncoug3012 on Aug 24, 2009 10:19 AM PDT reply actions

Because Tavita Pritchard is not a good quarterback

And you can count on us to keep writing no matter what. Although, if it ends up like last year, it might slow down. I mean, there are only so many ways you can say, “We suck.” But I’m hopeful it will be better this year.

CougCenter

by Jeff Nusser on Aug 24, 2009 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Why I want to see Lopina start

First off, I never thought that I would argue that a QB with a 0/11 TD to INT ratio would be someone I would argue for. But I digress.

There are a few things that have become clear from the writing both here and on other blogs by people watching the practices. Lopina looks better. But the real reason I think he should start is that he has emerged as a leader, someone who motivates his teammates and who his teammates trust. That is invaluable to a bad team, and let’s not kid ourselves too much that we are much above “bad.”

While we are likely to struggle, we need leadership in the huddle that isn’t letting guys get down. It’s not just a game to game struggle after losses to USC and such, but down to down. I think we have a chance, slim probably, but a chance to sneak a win against Stanford. For that to happen, we need a QB in the huddle that the team trusts and that doesn’t let the line get down after missed block, the RB’s after bad runs, or the recievers after drops. I think Lopina is our best shot for that kind of leadership.

by 02Coug on Aug 24, 2009 6:36 PM PDT reply actions

We need a QB....

That is accurate with his passes, reads defenses properly and doesn’t turn the ball over. That’s the kind of quarterbacking this team needs. That’s true leadership and it’s also very motivating to the rest of the team. Run the offense and take what the defense gives you.

Let the coaches worry about the mistakes the other kids on the team make.

As far as us being a ‘bad’ team, that’s what we were last year. I’m going to reserve judgment for this year’s squad. For crying out loud, the season hasn’t even started yet.

Go Cougs!!!

by SW WA Coug on Aug 24, 2009 7:03 PM PDT reply actions